201 comments:

Provide evidence that Crystal ever told the truth when she alleged she was raped.

Check out http://johnsville.blogspot.com/2007/06/crystal-gail-mangum-april-6-2006.html, a link to the statement which Crystal gave to the police. She alleged a gang rape in which multiple assailants penetrated her and left their bodily fluids on her. If her account was a true account, the male DNA found on her would have identified the assailants. As you have admitted in your compendium of bullshit the DNA did not match the DNA of any party attendee.

In earlier blogs, you have claimed that finding was not of any value to the defense and was not exculpatory. You again show you do not understand the law. What else is new.

Sidney, I again refer you to Crystal's police statement in which she alleged physical assaults. Yet the physical exam yielded no evidence of any injury. The only finding was diffuse vaginal edema, which was not a finding pathognomic of rape. So, again, stop the bullshit and explain why there was no evidence of rape.

Some more for tonight, Sidney, you refer your Medical background. I say again, your medical background is, you were never accepted into residency training, you never achieved medical specialty board certification, retired 17 years after you graduated from Medical School, and you spent most of those 17 years filing and losing frivolous, non meritorious lawsuits.

That is not at all much of a Medical background, any more than tossing a balsa airplane up into the air and then claiming you have a background as an aviator.

Sidney, regarding your lawsuit against WRAL, you say WRAL defamed you by claiming your lawsuit was related to the Duke Lacrosse case. You denied it was. Bur part two of your current sharlog contains a statement to the effect that Duke University Officials conspired to discriminate against you because of your advocacy for Nifong. You just shot down your lawsuit.

You have said earlier that you surmised that Duke officials hatched a conspiracy to have you arrested at the Breyer event. You base that claim that you sent letters, to the office of the President of Duke, and to the office of the Dean of the Law school, that this was how Duke officials became aware of your intention to attend the Breyer event. However, you have presented zero evidence any one in power at Duke ever read your letters, now, have you?

After the party, Kim Roberts/Pittman drove away with Crystal in her car. Kim Pittman/Roberts did call the police. Instead of reporting a rape, Kim Roberts/Pittman reported that people at the Lacrosse case had called her and her girlfriend "n---er". Then, instead of driving Crystal to a hospital or a police station, she drove Crystal to a grocery store parking lot and tried to force Crystal out of her car. That is not exactly how a woman would treat another woman who had been raped, now, is it.

Your acolyte, or, more properly your Wacko-lyte, Kenny said Kim Roberts/Pittman was unaware of the alleged rape. However in Crystal's police statement, Crystal claimed that Kim Roberts/Pittman knew Crystal was being held in the bathroom, the alleged scene of the alleged crime, that Kim Roberts/Pittman had asked her if she had been hurt and Crystal had replied that she had been hurt.

So explain why Kim Pittman/Roberts did not report a rape to the police, did not drive her to a hospital or to a police station.

Sidney Harr claims that each Lacrosse defendant received $20 million from Duke. He calls this a shakedown of Duke and has claimed that Duke could have prevailed in court if they had defended. Does it really make sense that an institution like Duke would have caved in to the Lacrosse Defendants if they could have saved tens of millions of dollars by not caving in. No it does not. This claim by Sidney shows his thinking processes are non existent.

The claim is based on a story that the IRS sent a notification to an accountant to the effect that one of the Lacrosse players owed $6 million plus. Anyone who has dealt with the IRS knows that if there is a problem with a tax return, the IRS contacts the taxpayer directly, not their accountant.

Sidney is just incredibly stupid and incredibly biased against and resentful towards people who are more accomplished than he is.

In an earlier blog you claimed that the male DNA found on Crystal, which you have admitted did not come from any party attendee, was of no value to the defense and was not exculpatory. How about you explain.

You bring up the problems members of the Lacrosse team had with the police, things like public urination and underage drinking, misdemeanor type of stuff, and the Lacrosse team was not the only group of Duke students involved in things like that.

You totally ignore, probably in an attempt to suppress, Crystal's major run in with the police years before she became the false accuser in the Duke Rape Hoax(I remind you, no one is required to prove Crystal lied-the state was required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Crystal told the truth). This incident involved an intoxicated Crystal stealing a cabbie's keys, stealing his cab, leading police on a high speed chase, then, after she was halted, trying to run down a police officer. Your wackolyte Kenny claims this was something fabricated by the Duke Lacrosse Players' lawyers. Kenny lied. The story came from Police records generated at the time of the incident.

No, it came from "yellow journalism" at the time. The accounts were extrapolated from the ridiculous over-charges the police laid. It was a she said he said with Crystal claiming he gave her the keys because he was intoxicated. Although she was going over the speed limit there was no high spend police chase. When backing up to park she brushed into the officer approaching her car. He had no injuries whatsoever. She did blow over the limit. The Judge saw through this and sentenced her appropriately. It has been played up to the hilt by the likes of you; no Grand Theft Auto, no High Speed Chase, no Attempted Vehicular Homicide

"No, it came from "yellow journalism" at the time. The accounts were extrapolated from the ridiculous over-charges the police laid. It was a she said he said with Crystal claiming he gave her the keys because he was intoxicated. Although she was going over the speed limit there was no high spend police chase. When backing up to park she brushed into the officer approaching her car. He had no injuries whatsoever. She did blow over the limit. The Judge saw through this and sentenced her appropriately. It has been played up to the hilt by the likes of you; no Grand Theft Auto, no High Speed Chase, no Attempted Vehicular Homicide".

Kenhyderal, Sidney's wackolyte again tries to bullshit his way through and around facts he does not like. This account is from Crystal's so called boo. Crystal, probably mare it up under the guidance of Vincent Clark, after the true account, from police records, became public, after Crystal's identity as the Duke Liar became known, after the Lacrosse players were thoroughly exonerated.

From http://www.foxnews.com/story/2007/04/11/crystal-gail-mangum-profile-duke-rape-accuser.html: "In June 2002, she was arrested on a multitude of charges while working at a topless dance club called Diamond Girls. According to police, she removed a customer's keys to his taxicab while giving him a lap dance, then stole the taxi while he was in the bathroom. Police chased her at speeds up to 70 miles per hour — frequently in the wrong lane(that IS a high speed chase, as well as reckless driving) — and when an officer tried to approach her, she barely missed running him over, and struck his patrol car instead. She tried to escape again, but a flat tire ended the second leg of her getaway. Finally in custody, she was found to have a blood-alcohol content of 0.19 (the state limit is 0.08)(that is driving when legally drunk). While being questioned, Mangum passed out and was taken to a hospital.

Call it yellow journalism if you want but each and every press account of Crystal's brush with the law in 2002 refers to police records. What evidence have you that the story originated with the Defense attorneys in the Rape Hoax.

You will probably come back with another lame description of proxies. That would be just an admission that you have zero evidence, just like you have zero evidence Crystal was ever raped.

That's the meta narrative. Here's what really happened. He gave her the keys and asked her to bring his car to him the next day since he was impaired. It was 70 in a 60 mph zone. On one occasion her left wheels crossed over the centre line. Driving the wrong way on a two lane highway involved her leaving the parking lot onto the road-way by way of the lot entrance She was not eluding capture, she did not notice the police car behind her. In pulling over she attempted to park off the roadway by backing up and brushed the approaching officer. As is so often the case in North Carolina with Black Citizens they laid a massive series of ridiculous charges eg. "felonious assault with a deadly weapon" ie. "the car". As is usual, of course, they pled it down to four misdemeanor charges not surprising since they had zero evidence to back up the charges they had laid.

"That's the meta narrative. Here's what really happened. He gave her the keys and asked her to bring his car to him the next day since he was impaired. It was 70 in a 60 mph zone. On one occasion her left wheels crossed over the centre line. Driving the wrong way on a two lane highway involved her leaving the parking lot onto the road-way by way of the lot entrance She was not eluding capture, she did not notice the police car behind her. In pulling over she attempted to park off the roadway by backing up and brushed the approaching officer. As is so often the case in North Carolina with Black Citizens they laid a massive series of ridiculous charges eg. "felonious assault with a deadly weapon" ie. "the car". As is usual, of course, they pled it down to four misdemeanor charges not surprising since they had zero evidence to back up the charges they had laid."

The only metanarrative in the Duke Rape Hoax is the one you try to perpetrate in the face of zero evidence that Crystal was raped.

The truth is that Crystal stolet he cabbie's keys, stole the cab, drove while legally drunk, drove recklessly and tried to run down a police officer. Your desire to pass your favorite murderess/false accuser, falsely, as a victim means nothing.

Again your description of what happened comes from Crystal's non credible version which came into being when Crystal, under the tutelage of Vincent Clark, tried to rehabilitate her image. It was a lie.

Just like it was a lie when she claimed in her miserable excuse of a book that she had been sexually assaulted.

Considering your claims that Nifong did not charge the innocent Duke Defendants with rape gives you zero credibility. You, I say again, resort to bullshit to get your way around and through facts which do not mesh with your guilt presuming wishful thinking.

Have you ever checked out http://johnsville.blogspot.com/2007/06/crystal-gail-mangum-april-6-2006.html, which takes you to Crystal's hand written statement given to police after she claimed she was raped. It describes a semen depositing gang rape.

About 9 months later, someone in Nifong's office interviewed her, the first time sinde she made her allegation that anyone in Nifong's office interviewed her. In that interview Crystal said she could not recall being penetrated.

Apparently, according to Kilgo, they are not unidentified and he does know who they are. Kilgo also reported that this friend said certain Players had participated. b.t.w. what do you consider "myth" #3 to be?

"Apparently, according to Kilgo, they are not unidentified and he does know who they are. Kilgo also reported that this friend said certain Players had participated. b.t.w. what do you consider "myth" #3 to be?"

Kenhyderal repeats the allegation about kilgo, something he can not document, meaning most likely this is something Kenny fabricated. More of Kenny trying to bullshit his way around and through facts which do not mesh with his guilt presuming wishful thinking.

Actually Sidney Harr is struggling to come up with an excuse to explain why his frivolous, non meritorious lawsuit was dismissed because the courts are prejudiced against him because he is a Nifong Supporter and because he is black.

Sidney expected that the State of North Carolina would never take Crystal to trial for the murder of REginald Daye and dismiss all charges. Sidney expected he would prevail in his lawsuits against Duke(he still blogs that his suits against Duke were strong), Sidney expected he would prevail in his lawsuit against DA Lorin Freeman, so Sidney's expectations are meaningless babble.

There is exactly zero chance you prevail in the hearing this week. The only victory you can hope for is you don't upset the Judge so much he throws you in jail for contempt.

I am sure you will wait at least a week to report back, you tend to go in hiding when you lose. But, you will then be back, complaining about the conflicts of interest for the Judge, and claiming he's protecting Duke as well.

There is exactly zero chance you prevail in the hearing this week. The only victory you can hope for is you don't upset the Judge so much he throws you in jail for contempt.

I am sure you will wait at least a week to report back, you tend to go in hiding when you lose. But, you will then be back, complaining about the conflicts of interest for the Judge, and claiming he's protecting Duke as well.

Tsk, tsk. Oh, Anony, ye of little faith. Actually, I believe that the chance of the judge ruling in my favor is quite great. The mere fact that he called a hearing to discuss the Motion to Dismiss filed by the Defendants is positive. That never happened in my lawsuit against Duke University when Judge Thomas Schroeder (on the faculty of Duke University Law School) dismissed my case.

I surmise, by the tenor of your comment, that you wish me ill at Wednesday morning hearing. In that case, may I suggest that you buy a bottle of anti-depressants, because by Wednesday afternoon they could come in handy.

Anonymous Anonymous said...Sidney expected that the State of North Carolina would never take Crystal to trial for the murder of REginald Daye and dismiss all charges. Sidney expected he would prevail in his lawsuits against Duke(he still blogs that his suits against Duke were strong), Sidney expected he would prevail in his lawsuit against DA Lorin Freeman, so Sidney's expectations are meaningless babble.

True... I didn't expect the state to take Mangum to trial because I thought it had more sense than it does. True, I thought I would prevail in my lawsuit against Duke because I had the false impression that I could receive a fair trial. As for Lorrin Freeman, I anticipated that my case would be held before an impartial judge. My expectations are based on what is fair and just... but unfortunately the world and our society is not. If there is any justice in North Carolina on Wednesday, I will prevail.

"True... I didn't expect the state to take Mangum to trial because I thought it had more sense than it does. True, I thought I would prevail in my lawsuit against Duke because I had the false impression that I could receive a fair trial. As for Lorrin Freeman, I anticipated that my case would be held before an impartial judge. My expectations are based on what is fair and just... but unfortunately the world and our society is not. If there is any justice in North Carolina on Wednesday, I will prevail."

Sidney Harr again trying to bullshit his way out of admitting his lawsuits are frivolous and non meritorious.

"Consider yourself elucidated."

I ay again, someone who is incapable of receiving elucidation is even more incapable of elucidating anyone else.

"gui, mon ami, I doubt that my definition of "justice" differs from that of the State. The problem is that the State does not always practice it."

Wrongo.

Your definition of justice is that Sidney Harr prevails regardless of whether or not he makes his case. One fundamental of the justice system is that the court, not the plaintiff, in these cases Sidney Harr, decides whether or not Sidney has made his case.

These last two Sidney posts are graphic evidence that Sidney's expectations of the NC justice system ARE meaningless babble.

And, the fact that State Courts in NC (unlike Federal Courts) are required to have a hearing, rather than just rule on the Motions is the reason a hearing was set, not because the Judge thinks there is some merit.

Sid will lose, completely, and will come back whining about the lack of Justice, and he will also file an appeal, which he will lose.

It is under advisement and may not get a ruling for as long as a month. Was disappointed that my Motion for Summary Judgment was not considered because it was technically not put on notice. Also, there was a last minute judge change, to which I objected... and Judge Hobgood had the case turned over to Judge Bryan Collins, about whom I know nothing. In Hobgood's court I requested up to an hour to present my case. In Collins' courtroom both sides were limited to thirty minutes. Therefore, I ran through my arguments as fast as my lips could move. In the end, I asked just for my day in court.

Must admit that I am not confident now because getting a day in court can be extremely difficult for a black litigant. Lebron James said, "Being black in America is tough." In court I said, "Being black in North Carolina is extremely tough."

So, I don't feel good, because I feel that it is difficult for black people to get justice in America generally... especially in North Carolina. But I will hope that I am wrong and the judge will give me my day in court. Like I said, I'm not optimistic... not because of the merits of my case but because of the politics of the system.

"It is under advisement and may not get a ruling for as long as a month. Was disappointed that my Motion for Summary Judgment was not considered because it was technically not put on notice. Also, there was a last minute judge change, to which I objected... and Judge Hobgood had the case turned over to Judge Bryan Collins, about whom I know nothing. In Hobgood's court I requested up to an hour to present my case. In Collins' courtroom both sides were limited to thirty minutes. Therefore, I ran through my arguments as fast as my lips could move. In the end, I asked just for my day in court.

Must admit that I am not confident now because getting a day in court can be extremely difficult for a black litigant. Lebron James said, "Being black in America is tough." In court I said, "Being black in North Carolina is extremely tough."

So, I don't feel good, because I feel that it is difficult for black people to get justice in America generally... especially in North Carolina. But I will hope that I am wrong and the judge will give me my day in court. Like I said, I'm not optimistic... not because of the merits of my case but because of the politics of the system."

Sidney whining again and again trying to bullshit his way around and through the fact that his suit is frivolous and not meritorious.

And, of course, Sid continues to believe the rules should not apply to him. He "technically" didn't notice his Motion for Summary Judgement, but it should have been considered anyway because he's Sid, and he's black, and rules shouldn't apply to him.

Anonymous Anonymous said...And, of course, Sid continues to believe the rules should not apply to him. He "technically" didn't notice his Motion for Summary Judgement, but it should have been considered anyway because he's Sid, and he's black, and rules shouldn't apply to him.

You are pathetic.

Anony,

Rules, like laws, are not commandments handed down from the heavens like manna... they are man-made and are often unjust, prejudicial, and amoral. What I seek is fairness, and seeing as how I am a layperson filing Pro Se, the Court should give me deference on matters of technicality when submitting a document that is done in good faith.

Sidney said: "What I seek is fairness, and seeing as how I am a layperson filing Pro Se, the Court should give me deference on matters of technicality when submitting a document that is done in good faith."

So, you are asking for different rules for someone who is layperson/Pro Se. If this was to happen, then a lawyer could advise their client to file Pro Se because of the different rules(relaxed) that apply between the two. Not sure why you feel you are so special, but your whole life seems to be that you are a "victim" of something or someone.

Rules, like laws, are not commandments handed down from the heavens like manna... they are man-made and are often unjust, prejudicial, and amoral. What I seek is fairness, and seeing as how I am a layperson filing Pro Se, the Court should give me deference on matters of technicality when submitting a document that is done in good faith."

Mr. Trudeau was banned from the US under the McCarran-Walter Act of 1952, which was passed into law over President Truman's veto, as an attempt to keep certain ideas some ideologogues founr offensive. See http://caulds.blogspot.ca/2016/10/have-you-heard-of-mccarran-walter-act.html

Kenny's anti American ideas are fueled by ideas he personally dislikes, like the truth that Crystal Mangum was never raped, that Crystal never told the truth about being raped.

If you are looking at this past year - no attorney has assisted Crystal. Meier's involvement was done in 2013 at the trial, Anne Peterson was done after the Court of Appeals appeal when Sid had Crystal fire her rather than pursue the Supreme Court Appeal.

Sid is making sure that Crystal is getting no help from anyone with legal training. He tells her they are all working against her, and she should trust him, even though he has yet to win a single case, and ignores any helpful advice that comes his way.

Kenny has been more effective in assisting Crystal with her legal problems over the past year. All he did was occasionally troll a website that hardly anyone reads and no one takes seriously. Sid, on the other hand, has done things that have hurt Crystal legally. By doing absolutely nothing of any consequence for her in the last year (and more) Kenny has actually helped Crystal more than Sid has.

In that regard, Tinfoil has done more than either Sid or Kenny to assist Mangum simply by disappearing.

guiowen said...Actually, thanks to Sidney she has the pleasure of a man who clearly admires her and is willing to spend much time with her.

Hey, gui, mon ami.

Yes, you put it well. I do admire Crystal very much. She has been through so much, yet remains strong. Obviously, I am exasperated that despite the evidence of her innocence and the criminality on the prosecution side, I have not been able to have her released after fighting for six years.

Anonymous Anonymous said...If you are looking at this past year - no attorney has assisted Crystal. Meier's involvement was done in 2013 at the trial, Anne Peterson was done after the Court of Appeals appeal when Sid had Crystal fire her rather than pursue the Supreme Court Appeal.

Sid is making sure that Crystal is getting no help from anyone with legal training. He tells her they are all working against her, and she should trust him, even though he has yet to win a single case, and ignores any helpful advice that comes his way.

Anony, you are wrong. I allowed the attorneys appointed to her or whom represented her to do their work, but unfortunately, they all sold her out. Regarding Peterson, she had the opportunity to make appeals on numerous meritorious issues, but she only appeal one... and the wosrt possible issue. Without doubt ineffective counsel should have been a topic for appeal.

It is clear that all attorneys who represented her did not have her best interests at heart. I always have.

Yes, you put it well. I do admire Crystal very much. She has been through so much, yet remains strong. Obviously, I am exasperated that despite the evidence of her innocence and the criminality on the prosecution side, I have not been able to have her released after fighting for six years."

Irrelevant statement.

There is no evidence of Crystal's innocence,, no evidence of criminality of the prosecution, just like there is no evidence Crystal was raped, no evidence Crystal ever told the truth

"Anony, you are wrong. I allowed the attorneys appointed to her or whom represented her to do their work,"

No you didn't.

"but unfortunately, they all sold her out."

No they didn't

"Regarding Peterson, she had the opportunity to make appeals on numerous meritorious issues, but she only appeal one... and the wosrt possible issue. Without doubt ineffective counsel should have been a topic for appeal."

No it wasn't.

"It is clear that all attorneys who represented her did not have her best interests at heart."

Sorry that I've been absent on the site recently, but I've been extremely busy working on a sharlog. Working on it night and day, actually, and at the same time, of course, doing what I can to help her release soon. I am very positive.

"Sorry that I've been absent on the site recently, but I've been extremely busy working on a sharlog. Working on it night and day, actually, and at the same time, of course, doing what I can to help her release soon. I am very positive."

You are working on another meaningless screed. What everyone else in the world is positive about is that you have done nothing to help Crystal and never will.

"Must get back to work. Hope to have it posted by week's end."

Will it contain anything new? So far your screeds just rehash a number of uncorroborated allegations.

That the State shouldn't have pursued the Larceny charges (she was acquitted, so they are done), and will falsely claim it had something to do with Felony Murder (despite all proof shown to him it didn't).

That Crystal turned down a plea offer (despite written proof from her attorney that the plea offer didn't exist, and the one she asked for was denied by the State - proof she has not contradicted, nor challenged).

That Freeman owed a duty to him to investigate the claims.

All kinds of other things - absolutely nothing new.

Walt - any word if the Federal Courts have ruled on the Habeas petition he filed, or on the civil lawsuit Sid filed there?

The myth was Crystal Mangum was raped in a bathroom that was too small during a time warp.Here's something that isn't a myth - According to the FBI there are 35-40,000 cases of black men raping white women every year in the United States.There are between 0 and 10 cases of white men raping black women.

Anonymous at 1:17 PM, knock it off. For all her faults and failings, Crystal is a human being and she does not deserve your opprobrium.

Anonymous at 5:05 AM wrote: "Walt - any word if the Federal Courts have ruled on the Habeas petition he filed, or on the civil lawsuit Sid filed there?"

Crystal's habeas petition is still under review. Sid's federal lawsuits are going nowhere. Sid screwed up his state court lawsuit, so he probably won't get a hearing on his claims at all. The Superior Court will dismiss the suit shortly, if it hasn't done so already.

Who's the evil Duke troll and clone of g who's cyberbullying me and committing hate crimes and trolling me again just when I thought it was safe to come back to this blog and read the new posts by dr harr? Listen to me all of you evil duke trolls it's time for you all to get a life and stop trolling me so that I don't have to report you to the FBI and press charges against you for hate crimes. Blah Blah Blah.

fy g you evil duke troll who can never stop trolling and bullying me and who continues to be the leader of the evil duke troll gang. do not troll me again and I mean never or I will have to ask dr harr to ban you from his blog so I can visit his blog without being bullied and harassed by the likes of an evil duke troll like you.

fy g and mini-g. you are the twin evil duke trolls who have nothing better to do with their time other than troll me and harass and cyberbully me, which proves that you are the ultimate evil duke trolls. i'm telling you for the last time to go back under your bridge and stop trolling and cyberbullying me or i will have to ask kenhyderal to deal with you as only he can and as he has shown many times when dealing with other trolls who harass him at this blog.

"Anonymous at 1:17 PM, knock it off. For all her faults and failings, Crystal is a human being and she does not deserve your opprobrium."

Crystal is a liar. She is a false accuser, a habitual criminal and a murderer. She has been the beneficiary of numerous opportunities, breaks and second chances and has squandered them all. She has yet to apologize or take responsibility for her myriad crimes, the lives she has destroyed (or attempted to destroy), or the havoc she has wrought on her family, NC, Durham, the justice system and her various victims. Unless and until she changes her ways, she deserves whatever scorn and opprobrium people choose to heap on her. It comes with the territory when you live the way Crystal lives. It is a natural consequence of the decisions she has made, the actions she has taken and the way she chooses to live her life.

"Crystal is a liar. She is a false accuser, a habitual criminal and a murderer. She has been the beneficiary of numerous opportunities, breaks and second chances and has squandered them all. She has yet to apologize or take responsibility for her myriad crimes, the lives she has destroyed (or attempted to destroy), or the havoc she has wrought on her family, NC, Durham, the justice system and her various victims. Unless and until she changes her ways, she deserves whatever scorn and opprobrium people choose to heap on her. It comes with the territory when you live the way Crystal lives. It is a natural consequence of the decisions she has made, the actions she has taken and the way she chooses to live her life."

You forgot to mention Crystal's enablers, the people who tell her she is a victim of everyone but herself, e.g. Race baiter Sl, Race baiter Jesse, Nifong, Sidney, Kenhyderal, William Cohan, the gang of 88, VIctoria Peterson. I am not defending Crystal. However, she would have been unable to wreak the havoc she did had she not had a host of enablers.

Noting what Crystal has done, and observing that comments like the type that Walt objected to is a natural consequence of that sort of behavior is neither casting the first stone nor judging her. Whatever derision and scorn is heaped on Crystal, she brought on herself and is responsible for fixing. Neither Walt, nor I, nor anyone else can save Crystal from the consequences of her actions. It's up to her.

"'Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her. John 8:7 Judge not lest you be judged. Matthew 7:1'"

Thus says Kenhyderal who passes judgments on the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players, on the victim of murderess Crystal Mangum, on the posters who call him out on his own guilt presuming racism, on those who called out corrupt DA Nifong for his wrongful, malicious prosecution of the innocent Lacrosse players, and bases his guilt presumption on something he alleges was said by the entity known as Kilgo, which allegation Kenny can not document ever happened.

Dr. Anonymous said: "There were no sequential causes or underlying causes which caused Reginald Daye's death".........................................Huh? As an attending Physician did you ever have cause to fill out a Cause of Death form? For a medical doctor you really make some rather foolish and ill-considered pronouncements.

Like you, it matters nothing to me that you do not consider me to be a friend of Crystal. I'm having trouble comprehending why this is an issue with you. It seems rather petty. But who knows, you seem to be unduly stung by my reference to you as a Duke Lacrosse Apologist. So stung that you feel the need to retaliate.

"Dr. Anonymous said: "There were no sequential causes or underlying causes which caused Reginald Daye's death".........................................Huh? As an attending Physician did you ever have cause to fill out a Cause of Death form? For a medical doctor you really make some rather foolish and ill-considered pronouncements."

Yet another iteration of no clinical ttrining, no cliical experience Kenhyderal, whose main exposure to anyone with a medical degree is Sidney Harr, the minimally trained, minimally experienced medical school graduate who never achieved medical specialty board certification who spent a rather brief post medical school career filing and losing frivolous lawsuits, talking like a deaf blind man who proclaims he sees and hears everything.

Crystal Mangum is a vicious murderer,psychopath,prostitute,drug addict,and false rape accuser.She should have been executed a long time ago but due to black female privilege she got off with a very light 14 year sentence.

How about KC Johnson? This vindictive blogger, with an extreme hatred for Duke President Brodhead, saw the Duke Lacrosse Defence strategy of sliming anyone questioning the guilt of their clients as a great vehicle for him to go after his nemesis. In this nefarious enterprise he became one of the defence's principal disseminators in the mutually beneficial enterprise of slandering Crystal and DA Nifong http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.ca/2007/06/moral-certainty.html

Anonymous at 7:02 AM wrote: "Crystal is a liar. She is a false accuser, a habitual criminal and a murderer."

She is a liar, false accuser and murderer, to be sure. However, she has not been convicted of the requisite three separate felonies in separate sessions of the Superior Court to be a habitual criminal.

"She has been the beneficiary of numerous opportunities, ... and has squandered them all. She has yet to apologize or take responsibility for her myriad crimes,.... Unless and until she changes her ways, she deserves whatever scorn and opprobrium people choose to heap on her."

For those things, criticism is valid and justified. However, the anonymous poster at 1:17 was not taking Crystal to task for her various crimes and lies. That anonymous poster wrote: "None of the lacrosse players would ever have wanted to have [sex] with someone as repulsive as Crystal Mangum much less go to all the trouble of raping her." That was an ad hominem attack. Criticizing Crystal for her misdeeds, crimes, lies and the like is certainly reasonable. She has, as you note, not apologized, nor made use of any of the second chances she has gotten. But, ad hominem attacks are not persuasive arguments, nor are they even valid arguments.

In his interview with 60 minutes Roy Cooper admitted that charging Mangum for lying about rape might cause racial tension so they decided not to.That would be an example of black female privilege plus she got a very lenient sentence for murder.

Crystal's conduct leaves her open to ad hominem, unreasonable and even offensive comments. I have found that unreasonable, outrageous and offensive actions often lead to outrageous, unreasonable and offensive reactions. I am sorry, but Crystal gets no pity from me. She deserves everything she gets unless and until she changes.

I saw an item today about Mr. Trump complaining about the dishonesty of the media in covering his presidency(if that is what you want to call it). Just like the way Sidney condemns the media for various things, the coverage of the exoneration of the innocent falsely accused members of the Duke Lacrosse team, and the coverage of Crystal's criminal activity.

There you go again g acting like the evil duke troll that you are and copying and pasting kenhyderal's posts just like you copy and paste my posts when you troll me and cyberbully me and its time for you to stop your constant trolling so that I can come to this blog and read dr harr's latest sharlog without being subjected to trolling and hate crimes. Now its time for mini-g to post that I am dr harr or kenhyderal posting anonymously. Blah Blah Blah

g you should be very proud of your twin evil duke troll mini-g who never gets tired of trolling and posting the same posts and acting like a cyberbully and hate criminal to show that you have trained him well as an evil duke troll.

Anonymous Anonymous said...I saw an item today about Mr. Trump complaining about the dishonesty of the media in covering his presidency(if that is what you want to call it). Just like the way Sidney condemns the media for various things, the coverage of the exoneration of the innocent falsely accused members of the Duke Lacrosse team, and the coverage of Crystal's criminal activity.

Sidney's behavior is very Trumpian, as I have said before.

Owww. That hurt! Actually my complaints about the media are quite unlike the media-bashing of Trump. Specifically, my complaint with WRAL-5 News is that its July 3, 2016 article is inaccurate. I believe the mistakes were made purposely to mislead the readers. The media goliath has yet to admit that it is mistaken about calling me a "Durham Man." Even though I wasn't born in Durham, never lived in Durham, never worked or went to school in Durham, and never gave Durham as my address, WRAL-5 News stands by its contention that it is substantially true that I am a Durham man.

Regarding Trump's media rants, it is my consideration that most of the media reporting is based on the truth... As hes declared war on the media, it is not unreasonable to believe that some news articles are skewed against him, but in the long run, I do not hold much sympathy for his position.

"Actually my complaints about the media are quite unlike the media-bashing of Trump."

No they are not.

"Specifically, my complaint with WRAL-5 News is that its July 3, 2016 article is inaccurate. I believe the mistakes were made purposely to mislead the readers."

You do more misleading of the readers than anyone.

"The media goliath has yet to admit that it is mistaken about calling me a "Durham Man." Even though I wasn't born in Durham, never lived in Durham, never worked or went to school in Durham, and never gave Durham as my address, WRAL-5 News stands by its contention that it is substantially true that I am a Durham man."

So how did that cause you any damages? It didn't.

"Regarding Trump's media rants, it is my consideration that most of the media reporting is based on the truth..."

Since when!!!??? Most of your ranting about the media is that it IS NOT based on the truth.

"As hes declared war on the media, it is not unreasonable to believe that some news articles are skewed against him, but in the long run, I do not hold much sympathy for his position."

g will you and your twin evil duke troll mini-g ever stop your trolling and cyberbullying that you have shown for years now on dr harr's blog and will you stop acting like a hate criminal who trolls and stalks and bullies like the two well trained evil duke trolls that you have become?

It's sad how Sid keeps arguing that a mistaken fact (that he was a Durham Man) is defamation and should get him a day in Court. He clearly has no intention of actually doing legal research or reading information posted here - because mistakes are not defamation, even lies, if they don't defame, aren't actionable.

He's admitted no damages - he just wants it corrected.

As we've stated - Sid is either utterly incompetent, or just an abuser who does this to keep an emotionally vulnerable Crystal tied to him so he can continue to manipulate and abuse her.

Sidney Harr believes that the Duke Lacrosse players were able to shake down Duke for $20 million each, even though Duke could have prevailed in court.

So now Sidney believes if he files suit for some reason, playing the race card,whomever he sues will cave in and pay him.

Sidney seems unaware of the contingency fee system. When asked why he does not retain a lawyer, his answer is something like, they are all in cahoots with the powers that be or the carpetbagger jihad or Duke or some other entity. If he hired a lawyer, any lawyer, then his lawyer would take his money and then sell him out.

Notice I did not say Sidney THINKS if he files suit for some reason, playing the race card,whomever he sues will cave in and pay him. Sidney is incapable of thinking.

g I'm worried about your twin evil duke troll mini-g because he has no life other than to read dr harr's blog and act like an evil duke troll and cyberbully by posting the same post over and over which is an advanced form of evil duke trolling and cyberbullying and proof that he needs help dealing with his evil duke trolling and cyberbullying

He does not think it is defamation when he calls the Innocent Lacrosse players guilty of raping Crystal. He has zero evidence Crystal was raped. He has zero evidence Crystal ever told the truth when she claimed she was raped. Each and every time he has described Crystal as the victim/accuser in the Duke Rape case he does proclaim the Lacrosse players guilty.

Interesting. However, unlike Mangum's case, this appears to be a case where the cause of death was due to the stab wound... unlike Daye's case in which the stab wound had nothing to do with his death. Also, noticed how she got charged with voluntary manslaughter... not first degree murder. And finally, note that her bail was a mere $100,000.00 compared to Mangum who was not allowed bail initially, then bail was set at $2 million.

Clearly points to cruel disparity of treatment wen it comes to Crystal Mangum.

He does not think it is defamation when he calls the Innocent Lacrosse players guilty of raping Crystal. He has zero evidence Crystal was raped. He has zero evidence Crystal ever told the truth when she claimed she was raped. Each and every time he has described Crystal as the victim/accuser in the Duke Rape case he does proclaim the Lacrosse players guilty.

Actually, your comment is inaccurate. First I never have opined that the Duke Lacrosse defendants were guilty of assaulting Mangum. I disagree that describing Mangum as a "victim/accuser" is the same as proclaiming the Duke defendants guilty.

Anonymous Anonymous said...Sidney Harr believes that the Duke Lacrosse players were able to shake down Duke for $20 million each, even though Duke could have prevailed in court.

So now Sidney believes if he files suit for some reason, playing the race card,whomever he sues will cave in and pay him.

Sidney seems unaware of the contingency fee system. When asked why he does not retain a lawyer, his answer is something like, they are all in cahoots with the powers that be or the carpetbagger jihad or Duke or some other entity. If he hired a lawyer, any lawyer, then his lawyer would take his money and then sell him out.

Notice I did not say Sidney THINKS if he files suit for some reason, playing the race card,whomever he sues will cave in and pay him. Sidney is incapable of thinking.

I did not file the lawsuit for the purpose of making money. The fact is that I tried to have the inaccuracies in the news articles corrected. However, everyone at WRAL-5 News ignored me. I was left with no alternative. Same thing happened with the 2010 Duke discrimination incident... Duke refused to communicate with me in good faith to resolve the problematic situation.

From Sidney Haee, the minimally trained, minimally experienced medical school graduate who was never accepted into residency training, who never achieved medical specialty board certification and who spent a truncated post medical school career not practicing medicine but filing and losing frivolous, non meritorious lawsuits:

"Interesting. However, unlike Mangum's case, this appears to be a case where the cause of death was due to the stab wound... unlike Daye's case in which the stab wound had nothing to do with his death."

Completely wrong. Reginald Dsye did die as a consequence of the stab wound inflicted by Reginald Daye.

"Also, noticed how she got charged with voluntary manslaughter... not first degree murder. And finally, note that her bail was a mere $100,000.00 compared to Mangum who was not allowed bail initially, then bail was set at $2 million."

That was because there was probable cause to believe Crystal did murder Reginald Daye.

"Clearly points to cruel disparity of treatment wen it comes to Crystal Mangum."

No it doesn't. All it points to is that Sidney believes his favorite murderess/false accuser should get a pass for her crimes.

"Actually, your comment is inaccurate. First I never have opined that the Duke Lacrosse defendants were guilty of assaulting Mangum. I disagree that describing Mangum as a "victim/accuser" is the same as proclaiming the Duke defendants guilty."

Disagree if you will, but by calling Crystal Mangum the "victim/accuser" in the "Duke Rape Case"(she was the victimizer/false accuser in the Duke Rape HOAX), you do proclaim the accused were guilty. That kind of statement reminds me of your attitude in your frivolous, non meritorious lawsuits against Duke, that you, not Duke, decides what is a violation of Duke's non solicitation policy.

Hypothetical question: supposed the accused did sue you for defamation. If I am correct, a defense would be the truth, proving that Crystal was raped. How could you prove Crystal was raped when you have zero evidence that Crystal was raped, that Crystal told the truth that she was raped?

Now you will rant and rave that AG Cooper sealed the case file. That is but an admission on your part that you have zero evidence that Crystal was ever raped.

"I did not file the lawsuit for the purpose of making money. The fact is that I tried to have the inaccuracies in the news articles corrected. However, everyone at WRAL-5 News ignored me. I was left with no alternative. Same thing happened with the 2010 Duke discrimination incident... Duke refused to communicate with me in good faith to resolve the problematic situation."

You have not made a case for the inaccuracies, purported or otherwise, to be defamatory. One item in which you are in denial is that your frivolous, non meritorious lawsuits against Duke were connected with the Duke Rape Hoax(which you erroneously refer to as the Duke Rape Case). You alleged that Duke's alleged discrimination against you happened because of your advocacy for DA Nifong in the Duke Rape Hoax(the Duke Rape HOAX, not the Duke Rape case).

You sent letters to the President of Duke and to the Dean of the Duke Law School informing them you intended to attend the Breyer event. Then you say people in either one of those offices conspired to discriminate against you. You have said on your blog that you have no hard evidence that anyone in either office, with the authority and power to discriminate against you ever read your letters. You just surmised someone did. Then you followed up with a statement that a reasonable individual would also surmise that people at Duke conspired to discriminate against you.

The court decides what a reasonable man would surmise, not you. In any event, surmising, from a truly reasonable individual or from you does not constitute evidence.

Consider yourself enlightened and elucidated.

And in my opinion, and possibly in the opinions of other reasonable individuals, you did file your suits hoping for a big settlement.

g let's see if your twin evil duke troll mini-g can break yesterday's record and troll and cyberbully me in less than 17 minutes by posting the same false post he posts every day when he acts like a hate criminal and the evil duke troll who you taught so well

g you know those aren't my name but are names you made up to troll and cyberbully me which you do constantly as the leader of the evil duke troll gang but someday when you are are all alone and realize that you have no friends you will be sorry you spent your life committing hate crimes and trolling and cyberbullying me as the evil duke troll and training mini-g in your duke trolling ways

I will respond to your message in the next day or two, but I do want to make you aware of several issues. First, I believe that your heart is in the right place. Your support of Mike Nifong doesn't go unnoticed. You are indeed one of a kind.

On Mike Nifong - As far as I am aware, he doesn't want any support or his license to practice law back. He conceded and stated his errors and gave-up his right to appeal. You may know more than I do, but that's what I'm reading.

Nifong did make mistakes, no doubt, but I couldn't tell you specifically what they are without reading all of the original case docs. I do believe that his intentions were good though. However, if he doesn't want support then trying to support him is an exercise in futility.

No amount of money or case analysis would get him back his license to practice law at this point in time.

I have no doubt whatsoever that she is a victim in this case as well as the case she's currently incarcerated for. However, I do not know who she is a victim of in this case. To explain my thoughts briefly...

I booked escort calls for around 15 years and have dealt with situations that most people could never even imagine. First and foremost, Crystal was a victim of the escort service that sent her to the party. It was called Allure I believe.

Never in 15 years of booking would I have helped these guys, or if I did, I'd have sent professional dancers, not escorts playing dancers. Professional dancers do not show up at parties with 1 hour notice and they do go with their own security. So, nothing like this could have happened at any calls I booked. I see this sort of crap going on all the time - booker sends an escort to a party and really doesn't give a rat's rear what happens to her. And then there are escorts dumb enough to go. Still, it's the agency's fault.

Wondering why we never saw anything in the news about legal actions, criminal and civil, against the escort service.

From the very beginning of this story I have believed that Crystal was drugged. So she is a victim of whoever drugged her and the service, because if the service is dumb enough to send escorts to a call like this, at the very least they could have warned her to never, ever accept an unopened drink.

I recall reading different information, now buried, about the symptoms Crystal had that night and in general her actions. Having been drugged in an Orlando club long ago, I know the experience enough to know that she was drugged. However, what I do not know is where she was drugged and who did it.

If Crystal often accepted unopened drinks, she may have been drugged at the call right before this party. No way to know that without a complete timeline of her entire night. And then no one tested her for the drugs that could have been used, so no way to prove it anyway.